Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: "Fast Track" which is needed to pass the TPP, is in trouble on the Hill [View all]pampango
(24,692 posts)19. Similar to the Syria vote, a coalition of labor-aligned Democrats and tea partiers can stop it.
Obama-wary Tea Partiers and labor-aligned Democrats could block "fast-track" authority for two huge agreements.
It is generally agreed that the Obama will not be able to conclude the TPP and TTIP negotiations unless Congress grants him Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) -- commonly known as "fast-track" -- which guarantees that Congress will hold a straight up or down vote on any trade agreement the president negotiates.
When Congress grants TPA to a president, the authorizing legislation always includes negotiating objectives. This is a reminder to the president that he is acting as a delegate from Congress. The negotiating objectives themselves, however, often become the major point of contention. It was a battle over labor and environmental standards, for example, that prevented the House from granting President Clinton fast-track authority in 1998.
In the Senate, Democrat Max Baucus is already leading the charge for the renewal of TPA. He can expect significant Republican support, but may have some trouble corralling members of his own party. Democrat Sherrod Brown, whose power base in Northeast Ohio's Rust Belt remains upset about the 1994 NAFTA, has already expressed reservations. And since fast-track authorization is subject to filibuster, Obama may need all the votes he can get.
The battle in the House might be even more interesting. ... One can easily see an odd alliance in the House between progressive Democrats, who reflect the concerns of organized labor, and Tea Party Republicans, who don't want to give power away to the president. Even Rep. Darrell Issa, usually a free-trade advocate, might oppose it because of suspicions about the secretive nature of the TPP negotiations.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/the-odd-bipartisan-coalition-that-could-sink-obamas-free-trade-legacy/276938/
If it is only "progressive Democrats, who reflect the concerns of organized labor" who oppose "fast track" in the House, it will pass anyway if Boehner and the tea party types support it. That seems likely not to be the case.
It is generally agreed that the Obama will not be able to conclude the TPP and TTIP negotiations unless Congress grants him Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) -- commonly known as "fast-track" -- which guarantees that Congress will hold a straight up or down vote on any trade agreement the president negotiates.
When Congress grants TPA to a president, the authorizing legislation always includes negotiating objectives. This is a reminder to the president that he is acting as a delegate from Congress. The negotiating objectives themselves, however, often become the major point of contention. It was a battle over labor and environmental standards, for example, that prevented the House from granting President Clinton fast-track authority in 1998.
In the Senate, Democrat Max Baucus is already leading the charge for the renewal of TPA. He can expect significant Republican support, but may have some trouble corralling members of his own party. Democrat Sherrod Brown, whose power base in Northeast Ohio's Rust Belt remains upset about the 1994 NAFTA, has already expressed reservations. And since fast-track authorization is subject to filibuster, Obama may need all the votes he can get.
The battle in the House might be even more interesting. ... One can easily see an odd alliance in the House between progressive Democrats, who reflect the concerns of organized labor, and Tea Party Republicans, who don't want to give power away to the president. Even Rep. Darrell Issa, usually a free-trade advocate, might oppose it because of suspicions about the secretive nature of the TPP negotiations.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/the-odd-bipartisan-coalition-that-could-sink-obamas-free-trade-legacy/276938/
If it is only "progressive Democrats, who reflect the concerns of organized labor" who oppose "fast track" in the House, it will pass anyway if Boehner and the tea party types support it. That seems likely not to be the case.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
58 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Similar to the Syria vote, a coalition of labor-aligned Democrats and tea partiers can stop it.
pampango
Sep 2013
#19
Which begs the question: "Strange bedfellows" in a possible "relationship" or just a couple
pampango
Sep 2013
#56
Just a couple of one-night stands IMO. If this was being negotiated.......
socialist_n_TN
Sep 2013
#57
Maybe but perhaps not if that "Tea party style Republican" president were Rand Paul.
pampango
Sep 2013
#58
Definitely Time, Ma'am, To Stop One Of These 'Trade Agreement' Corporate Immunity Swindles
The Magistrate
Sep 2013
#26